Category 6: Day of Destruction_720p(480P)

source: Category 6: Day of Destruction

I wish I had read the comments on IMDb before I saw this movie. The first 1 hour was OK, though it did make me wonder why everything was centered at Chicago and why no one reported any weather anomaly from outside US. Isolated acts of nature (of this magnitude) are unthinkable. But beyond the first 60 minutes, the movie just drags on like a never-ending story. The screenplay is horrible. As for the actors, very poor choice. Only the people hired to run in panic stick to their roles. But I do have to agree that this movie has got some good 'special effects'. If you rented it on a DVD and would want to watch the movie, despite the reviews, then play it on maximum speed your player would allow!

Anyone who complains about Peter Jackson making movies too long should sit through this CBS "event". There's about 45 minutes of story padded by 2 hours of unnecessary subplots, featuring bland by-the-book TV drama clichés. Bad science is a staple for crappy weather disaster movies, so I'm not going to complain about that. Silly science can be fun to watch if it's executed in an amusing fashion. What kills this movie is it's 10 subplots... all of which could be excised without destroying what is supposed to be the central plot. The one character that is entertaining to watch in Category 6 is Tornado Tommy, despite being a very annoying stereotype. Note that I also didn't bother commenting on special effects. Their quality should come as no surprise. Not recommended.

The only reason I know this film exists is because I wanted to see what Nancy McKeon had been up to since The Facts of Life ended. When I searched her name, up came this relatively new TV movie. After much investigation I managed to locate a copy & was thoroughly disappointed with what I viewed. D Grade acting, poor script, terrible FX - it was like watching a toned down, more stupefied version of Day After Tomorrow that went for 3 hours. Despite the long running time the characters remain fairly under-developed, we do not care about them in the slightest & in most cases are longing for their demise. Combine that with terrible lighting & cinematography & you have a real disaster of a film. How they con-viced so many "name" actors (i.e Dianne Weist, Randy Quaid, Brian Dennehy) to appear in such trash is mind-blowing. In summary - I want those 3 hours of my life back!!!

Sort of like a train wreck, I had to watch this and part seven. Very goofy, but had some interesting yet predictable plot lines. The whole message of this series (at least the two parts I watched) seemed to be that we humans are bad, bad creatures. According to what I gleaned from these two parts: We and we alone caused global warming, should recycle more, should stop driving and should stop using so much energy. And of course, all energy companies are evil. A very preachy series! Oy! Some of the plots were predicable. Like Chandra West and Thomas Gibson in their obvious extra-marital affair, crisis with family, resolve issues during weather disaster. Randy Quaid was a hoot as he more or less did a reprise of his "Independence Day" role as a whacked-out misfit. A lot of the special effects were repeated in both 6 & 7 (like a skyline view of Chicago then a skyline of Washington, D.C., with the same carnage in the foreground - or a repeat shot of a power plant, one in Chicago, one in D.C.). I had to suspend disbelief as the time-line of many of these events and scenes defied logic. Overall – poorly written storyline with average acting and quirky special effects.

I can't believe I actually spent almost three hours of my life watching this. This must be one of the most unbelievable, predictable and cheesy television movies I have seen in a long time. I was hoping for some good special effects and action, instead I spent the entire time rolling my eyes and yelling "OH COME ON!!!", at the screen. The dialog is shallow and obvious, the acting strained at times and as the story moves along, isn't it just funny how EVERYTHING happens at the same time... Not to mention the obvious and nauseating ending... Now I've seen more than my share of disaster movies, I am a big fan actually, and think that often they can pull off completely unrealistic stuff as long as it's done in a fun way, but this is definitely not it. This is just an insult to intelligent viewers everywhere. What were they thinking when they made this movie?????

This one was truly awful. Watching with fascinated horror, I kept on asking "why have they done this?" That is, taken all the scenarios out of "The Day after Tomorrow", "The Perfect Storm" and "Twister" and remixing them in a three-hour miniseries, directed by long-time junk TV director Dick Lowry, with every disaster movie cliché known to man and not an ounce of real suspense. Many of the cast were unknown Canadians and location filming was done in Canada, Winnepeg doubling for Chicago, so no doubt tax breaks had something to do with it. Although some ambitious special effects were attempted, the execution is so poor no decent spectacle is achieved. The actors may be a competent lot; the script is so bad no-one had a chance to show it, except perhaps for Randy Quaid as Tommy the Tornado chaser, who went right over the top and was quite amusing. Believe it or not, the producers have since made another one of these Canadian disaster turkeys called "Category 7 – the End of the World" which was very tastefully shown on CBS in the US a few weeks after Hurricane Katrina. How could the network of Ed Murrow and Walter Cronkite do such a thing? In prime time? PT Barnum "nobody ever went broke underestimating public taste" is proved right once more.

I'll admit that having heard all these negative things about this 2 part movie, that it wasn't all that bad. It certainly wasn't as bad as I had expected but it also really wasn't too much good either. The movie is filled with many stupid silly plot-lines. They are so all formulaic that none of them offers any surprises. On top of that, the dialog in the movie is absolutely horrible. At times it even manages to become laughable. This is the sort of typical dramatic disaster movie that features many characters in it, of which none really ever work out as an interesting or engaging one. This movie isn't about natural disasters, this is about people and their personal problems. Now is that anything new or interesting? I mean, I've I wanted to follow a story like this I would watch a soap opera in stead. It's the sort of mistake "Deep Impact" and disaster movies in general often make. The movie at times tries to put in morale in about the environment and global warming and such but all those things come across as forced and look silly because of that in the movie. It seems to take for ever before the introduction and build-up in the story stops. There is a lot of talking about natural disasters but not enough of it gets actually shown on the screen. The movie is too long on its drama. The use of news archive material of bad weather conditions and tornadoes is too obvious. It makes the movie seem even more cheap and silly. There are some good actors in the movie but even they can't make the movie work out fully- or the dialog. Randy Quaid, Dianne Wiest and Brian Dennehy are no small time actors. Guess they also regret being in this, looking back at it. But the movie does a good job at keeping the pace high, even though when nothing is happening. For a made for TV production this really wasn't all that bad. I mean, I have seen far worse attempts. The movie was overall good looking, despite of the weak and cheap special effects. But I don't really see what's the big deal about it, since the special effects get never featured that prominently in the movie. I therefor also feel that some of the negativity toward this movie is for most part unjustified. Not that it deserves raving criticism but its a decent attempt that does not bore but just becomes too silly and unlikely in parts. 5/10 http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

There was some doubts in my mind about this two(2) part film which depicted all kinds of problems that were facing the Mid-West and especially the "Windy CITY". I will say that the producers and directors did a fair job of using special effects which seemed to be repeated over and over again. Nancy McKeon,(Amy),"The Division",'01,TV Series, gave a compelling performance along with veteran actor, Brian Dennehy,(Andy Goodman),"She Hate Me",'04, who gave a great supporting role. It was very surprising to see Dianne Wiest,(Secretary Abbott),"Not Afraid, Not Afraid",'01, appearing in this role and I have no understanding why an Academy Award Winner would have agreed to appearing in this picture! If you want to see this film, just watch the Second(2nd) Part of the film and you will find out it is boring and a great WASTE OF TIME!!!